In a decision reached Friday, the Kentucky Court of Appeals has overturned Dr. Rod Stewart’s four-year suspension for possession of cobra venom.

According to a report in the Blood-Horse, the court stated that the veterinarian was punished under a “vague” regulation. The judges also declined to reverse a lower court ruling on Stewart’s behalf that would’ve dismissed a one-year suspension he received for possession of carbidopa and levodopa.

Stewart was suspended for four years in Sept. 2009 for possession of three sealed vials of cobra venom, in addition to the carbidopa and levodopa, which were found during a search and seizure of items in Patrick Biancone’s Keeneland barn in June 2007.

For every truly wronged individual in racing, there must be 25 Dutrows that slide off the hook.

Part of the problem is that private lawyers are smarter than public lawyers. This case is a perfect example.

Windways

Just one more slap in the face for the owners and trainers that operate within the rules of the game. I just keep asking myself “and why am I still in this game”?

S

Then get out of the game, no one makes you race.

MrPeabody

Your response brings to mind the words of the noted ophiologist upon discovery of a tunnel created by Vipera aspis: “Look, its an ,,,!” Pardon my lisp.

FEDavidson

So, the answer is quite simple. Since the Court apparently siezed on the vagueness of a regulation that isn’t specific with regard to what substances are illegal, if the Commission adopts a regulation that states that all substances are illegal unless specifically permitted for use, then the problem is solved…..with one caveat…..you’ll have to trust the government (I say that with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek) to create a list of acceptable substances, or classifications of substances, such as hay, water, grain, and so on and so on. Then, of course, the lobbies seeking approval for use of items desired by the cheaters, bogged down by the inefficiencies of bureaucracy, coupled with a dash of arrogance and ignorance, will have an interesting job convincing the Commission and the public (assuming a public hearing requirement) that the proposed substances are reasonable, necessary and only for the benefit of the horse. Maybe the answer isn’t so simple, but it isn’t rocket science.
And, Barry’s absolutely right, this would appear to be a matter of private counsel prevailing over government counsel. More importantly, the decision sends a very bad message that will most likely enable those who prefer to win by means of the marvels of modern pharmacology.